Back to the 1980s

Oct 2, 2015

EXPLOSIVE REVELATION - has the Gold Coast really time warped back to the 1980s? Or in Hinze sight, is it here we Joh again?

The hugely controversial Iluka development application (reported as the Gold Coast's biggest ever) was approved in the middle of the night a week ago by the mysterious 'delegated authority' and without full council input or vote. It's no surprise that it (the decision process) has been labelled as totally unethical and autocratic by so many, has infuriated some councillors and has set a frightening precedent where the developers and not the community now determine the future of our city.

As is typical with developments like this, it has some offsets called 'plot ratio bonuses' in the development application. The offsets are usually required as a show of good faith from the developers, and are supposed to be things that provide benefit to the community by way of infrastructure, investment or improvements in the surrounding areas. Council bureaucrats/committees usually determine these offsets and most councillors never see what is in the documents until after the DA is approved - as is the case here.

So what 'benefits' does this proposal deliver to our community, citizens and surrounding areas to balance the impact of the development?

Why it's over $1.3 million contribution for acess to flash new green bridge ($7 million estimated amount for bridge) and bikeway into and out of an adjacent suburb, away from the development, and in the exact precinct where Tom Tate's personal lawyer and "close friend" Tony Hickey has his Chevron Island 'Thomas' development approved - of course!

What a tremendously fortuitous stroke of luck!!!

If seen into fruition, the bikeway and bridge have the significant potential to greatly improve the value of developments and properties in the Chevron Precinct, including Mr Hickey's controversial $50 million high rise development.

The 'St Thomas Place' development was the first to challenge the building height limits in the area and break them, with council voting to not follow the limits. There was heated debate and some councillors were for and some against. Despite declaring just before the vote that there would clearly be a 'perceived conflict of interest' given the close personal relationship in play, Mayor Tom Tate still remained on in the room and voted to support his "good friend's" high rise development to go ahead. Read about it here

Tony Hickey is principal partner in Hickey Lawyers and the mayor's personal friend and lawyer. Hickey Lawyer's is listed as the local law partner in the ASF China Consortium's Broadwater push. Mr Hickey is also reported as the spokesperson for Forise Holdings here, the company behind the Iluka development proposal. We are told The Forise development is said to have originated after Mr Tate and Mr Hickey visited China some time ago.

Mr Hickey is reported in the paper as saying the Iluka development "would not have been possible without the ... advocacy of the mayor who met with Forise a year ago in China and encouraged the group to invest on the Gold Coast."

There's a lot of food for thought here ... we'll let you form your own opinions.

Will this be the end of the town plan and height limits across the city, including The Spit, and instead will council bureaucrats under the leadership of Tom Tate have open slather on it from now on?

Do developers decide the fate of this city and not its people?

What mysterious 'delegated authority' will control The Spit development approvals?

Will the councillors again be secretly and quietly shut out, disenfranchising rate payers, residents and the whole city from any kind of ethical democratic representation?

Why does it seem to always pay to be one of Tate's mates?

Will private 'partners' somehow benefit from these generous plot ratio bonuses being gifted out under the guise of 'community benefits'?

We feel that there is a lot more to this story than is on the surface, and struggle to comprehend how the local media isn't on to all of this, at least pressing those concerned for answers and digging into the documents.